[jo kus]

When did transubstantiation become dogma in the Roman Catholic Church?

That is not pertinent to the question regarding the interpretation of John 6:53-54. The question is "Why don't you interpret it the way it is clearly written in the Bible"? Regarding the rest of your points, I don't see how ANY of them go AGAINST the Scripures. Perhaps you disagree that they are there, but none of them contradict the Scriptures, unlike Protestant Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide, which are clearly AGAINST the Scriptures.

Perhaps I should be asking you "Why do you as a Protestant go against the Scriptures"?

Regards

[wmfights]

"When did transubstantiation become dogma in the Roman Catholic Church?

That is not pertinent to the question regarding the interpretation of John 6:53-54. The question is "Why don't you interpret it the way it is clearly written in the Bible"? "
____________________________________________
I read John 6:53-54 in context with Luke 22:19-20.

Also, in reading John 6:53-54 I don't see anyone at the synagogue in Capernaum trying to actually eat the Messiah, or drink his blood as he stood there.

BTW when did transubstantiation become dogma in the Roman Catholic Church?

When did indulgences become doctrine?

When did Mariology and the immaculate conception become doctrine?

When did the infalibility of the Pope and his being the leader of all Christians become doctrine?

I would love to see your SCRIPTURAL basis for these positions the Roman Church takes.

Regards to you as well